Victoria Dye <vdye@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Martin Ågren wrote:
>> There are two identical declarations of `ensure_full_index()` in
>> cache.h.
>>
>> Commit 3964fc2aae ("sparse-index: add guard to ensure full index",
>> 2021-03-30) provided an empty implementation of `ensure_full_index()`,
>> declaring it in a new file sparse-index.h. When commit 4300f8442a
>> ("sparse-index: implement ensure_full_index()", 2021-03-30) fleshed out
>> the implementation, it added an identical declaration to cache.h.
>>
>> Then 118a2e8bde ("cache: move ensure_full_index() to cache.h",
>> 2021-04-01) favored having the declaration in cache.h. Because of the
>> double declaration, at that point we could have just dropped the one in
>> sparse-index.h, but instead it got moved to cache.h.
>>
>> As a result, cache.h contains the exact same function declaration twice.
>> Drop the one under "/* Name hashing */", in favor of the one under
>> "/* Initialize and use the cache information */".
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> cache.h | 2 --
>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
>> index 5d7463e6fb..281f00ab1b 100644
>> --- a/cache.h
>> +++ b/cache.h
>> @@ -350,8 +350,6 @@ void add_name_hash(struct index_state *istate, struct cache_entry *ce);
>> void remove_name_hash(struct index_state *istate, struct cache_entry *ce);
>> void free_name_hash(struct index_state *istate);
>>
>> -void ensure_full_index(struct index_state *istate);
>> -
>> /* Cache entry creation and cleanup */
>>
>> /*
>
> Thanks for cleaning up the duplicate, looks good to me!
Thanks, both.
